Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Thu, May 24 2012, 10:21PM
Hello folks! I have taken Petra's suggestion to start a new thread for those of us who wish to continue arguing, thus leaving the other thread to get back on track. Hope people agree!
Parla:
So, when I simply state what I see in the score (and in the work when it is performed) is an "analysis". The fact that this can be done by anyone in the same way, if he/she follows the score, I don't know what kind of analysis it is, much more what kind of "evaluation". Chris, following the same process, he simply stated: "couldn't agree more". Even if this is an analysis, where is the analogy with the sports pundits. Am I going to be wrong, when I simply state what I see there in the definitive score? Is my "analysis" anything original compare to what says the score and the work itself?
Parla - thanks for your likewise civilized response to me above, but as far as this one goes to Tagalie, if T will not mind me butting in, I am going to have to spend some time tomorrow am trying to decode or deconstruct this paragraph! I ain't got a clue what it means!Seriously.
Mark
Thu, May 24 2012, 10:29PM
#2
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Certain music by certain composers is superior to all other music. Beethoven reaches the pinnacle of the musical artist, in fact in any art form. This is proven by the concensus of opinion of those who know music. The musically educated. There are plenty of fools about to argue otherwise, that it is just a personal view point, but they are politically misguided. You don't need objective proof. It is a court of law, beyond a reasonable doubt will do. Beethoven is charged with being the greatest artist that ever lived, how do we find him. GUILTY.
Thu, May 24 2012, 10:40PM
#3
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Yes Hugh...er I mean Uber... and I might well be in agreement with you on Beethoven. If we took a mori poll or whatever tomorrow, the vast majority might say Beethoven...
And I think as I said earlier that there is something to be taken seriously alright in the consensus of opinion idea.
BUT there are other great composers. Perhaps there are some waiting to be discovered, or re-discovered...who knows!
Mark
Thu, May 24 2012, 10:56PM
#4
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Yes Hugh...er I mean Uber... and I might well be in agreement with you on Beethoven. If we took a mori poll or whatever tomorrow, the vast majority might say Beethoven...
Mark
A Mori Poll, I'm not interested in a mori poll. This is not a democracy, we don't give the vote to any old fool that wanders in.
Fri, May 25 2012, 1:45AM
#5
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
I'm afraid others might not follow your polite move to establish this thread, so that the "most forgotten..." might be liberated. However, I can reply to you here.
The diificult first paragraph refers to a claim by Tagalie that I resort too often to analysis, because I mentioned the "Trout" and the examples of the First Movements of Beethoven's Ninth and First. So, if we have to go step by step, here it is:
- When I simply state what I see in the score (or of what I listen in a performance or by doing both), is that an analysis?
- When anyone, who is able to follow the same procedure, can repeat the same thing or simply cannot agree more with the findings (Chris), what sort of "analysis" is that? To state that you see that there is a modulation here and another there or a wider and more advanced development in one work vis a vis the other is a kind of "original" analysis or even "evaluation" or a simple identification and verification of the features of the actual score/musical work?
That's to start with the quite a few points arisen.
Good day, Mark.
Parla
Fri, May 25 2012, 5:31AM
#6
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Answers to Mark: Second part.
"Skills" and "vision" are "both hugely important factors that are sometimes below the surface or sub-textual, in musical terms or evident on the surface".
I have no problem with this sentence with such a broad and vague (sometimes, or or) meaning. The point is that the skills play a specific role in the musical value of the work, but they are not the only "weapon" of the composer. I have a problem in which way the "vision" works in the concrete musical value of the work? What is the vision of Bach in his Partita no 2 for Solo Violin or in his Art of Fugue? Composers like Bach, Haydn, Mozart or Schubert were so prolific. How can we identify the "vision" of the composer in every single work we are about to listen and why is it important for the musical (not the overall) value of the work? What's the big deal of the vision of Schubert for the artisitc value of the "Trout" Quintet?
"Refine" the rules is not at all to "redifine" them. We have not yet reached the stage (in this forum) of defining "Music". We struggle with the terms of reference for defining "greatness" in music too. So do you thing we understand what we mean, when we are talking about the "rules"? Your understanding of how to use the Sonata form is a perfect example of how you miss the point, probably deliberately. I said the Sonata form is a very sure and the strongest "weapon" for a potential composer. However, he has to find out in his composition, whether he will need an introduction, how the two themes have to be presented, the appropriate tonality, which can help the development, how the themes have to come in the recapitulation, if the coda has to be used as a second development and, finally, the resolution of the composition. So, the Sonata form is not a "recipe" for greatness by itself, but the vehicle to that end. It's a quite difficult "rule" to follow and the potential composer should use all the other rules of music, deep knowledge, experience, further study and so on.
As for the score and recording (or even the live performance), of course, you can use any or all of them to "get a (not the) feeling for what's going on". My point is that you can identify even only from the score if the development of the First Movement of the First Symphony by Beethoven is less advanced compared to the Ninth (or the Third, for that matter) or how the modulations in the Fourth Movement of the "Trout" function.
As for the infamous "analogy" with the sport pundits, I don't wear any "mantle" of the expert. You may see me as such, but, this is a forum of anonymous people. None of us is anything. We just try to communicate with messages. That's all! I don't pretend I know any percentage of the 100% of what's going on in any composition whatsoever, but I can point out few things (as Chris, you or others can do as well) to facilitate our discussion and potential quest to reach a common point of comprehending each other.
Finally, the vision for the "big things", leave it for much later. It has very little to do with a mere composition. Do we need D. Scarlatti's vision (for a big thing) in order to comprehend and admire the perfection of his Sonata in E, Kk. 380? Or Haydn's superb Piano Sonata in E flat, No. 62?
Sorry for the length, but I simply respond...
Parla
Fri, May 25 2012, 5:54AM
#7
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
This is not a democracy, we don't give the vote to any old fool that wanders in.
I agree - it's what the music establishment thinks that's valid.
Fri, May 25 2012, 7:11AM
#8
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
We have not yet reached the stage (in this forum) of defining "Music".
Music is a series of man made sounds which people listen to for entertainment and relaxation. And which other people produce to make money.
What's the big deal?
Fri, May 25 2012, 7:42AM
#9
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
The big deal, Craig, is how many of the participants may agree on this "definition". I cannot and I have quite a few questions on it, like "what kind of sounds" (all kind, even the noises, any possible sound). "Man-made" means whatever sound our body can produce? And some more.
However, let's wait and see.
Parla
Fri, May 25 2012, 8:04AM
#10
RE:
I would be interested to see other people produce other definitions which are not incomplete and only define certain types of music. Any definition will have to be appropriate for the works of Snoop Dog and the Eurovision song context as well as the Missa Solemnis.
As you say let’s wait and see.
Fri, May 25 2012, 8:39AM
#11
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Hugh - talk of voting has reminded me:
When the poll cards arrive you have to discard nine of them!
Fri, May 25 2012, 9:19AM
#12
RE: Define music
I would be interested to see other people produce other definitions which are not incomplete and only define certain types of music. Any definition will have to be appropriate for the works of Snoop Dog and the Eurovision song context as well as the Missa Solemnis.
We are not interested in defining music that includes Snoop Doggy Dog and the Eurovision song contest. We do not want drinks that include cheap strong cider mixed with white wine or vodka mixed with irn bru. We want the finest wines known to humanity, we want them here and we want them now.
Fri, May 25 2012, 10:34AM
#13
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Do you consider your definition, Craig, as "complete"? You should really have a very Procrustean vision of the Art of Music. So, where "Verdi's Requiem" falls: in the "relaxation" or the "entertainment"? Likewise, Beethoven's Late String Quartets?
By the way, how this "a series" of man made sounds is defined (or refined)?
For your info, for the time being we talk about the definition of Music, namely "what is Music". The "relaxation, entertainment or money" might answer a further question, not needed at this stage, of the purpose of the composition.
Parla
Fri, May 25 2012, 12:06PM
#14
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Do you consider your definition, Craig, as "complete"? You should really have a very Procrustean vision of the Art of Music. So, where "Verdi's Requiem" falls: in the "relaxation" or the "entertainment"? Likewise, Beethoven's Late String Quartets?
Well, people pay good money to hear Verdi's Requiem so it's a reasonable assumption that they enjoy doing so. Are you suggesting they do it for other reasons?
Fri, May 25 2012, 12:23PM
#15
RE: Continuation of issues arising from most forgotten thread...
Just how unbearable is your lightness of being Craig.
Parla -
I'm not surprised if Tagalie got me wrong as for the "skills", but I didn't expect you to follow him that close.
No, I'm not following Tagalie 'that close'. I spoke about vision, and Tagalie spoke about skill. As the meerkat would say - they don't even sound same! But I do agree with him. They are both hugely important factors that are sometimes below the surface, or sub-textual in musical terms. Or maybe they are evident on the surface. Either way, great art is great because the total is greater than the sum of the parts. We can't define everything that goes into the totality. There are some mysterious elements. You might agree with me Parla that those elements might be divinely inspired at times, or humanly inspired. There are those I respect like Vic who would only argue humanly. Whatever.The fact is that the artist's skill lies not just in the manipulation of oil on canvas say but on something much bigger.
Eventually, one day, some of the "objectivists" started drawing conclusions that if we follow that rule or that "formula", we should always have the same or of the same "quality"/"greatness" result, but since we don't, the rules do not play any role. So, now, we are in the phase where we have to refine the definition or at least the area of greatness vis a vis the rules, laws, formulas etc.
Ah! So now we have to re-define the rules...
As far as I may understand from our previous exchanges, you have studied some music and you can read or follow a score.
Yes I have and yes I can, but I can only follow the score with the recording. Elsewhere I can look at the/score text and get a feeling for what's going on, but I wasn't given the gift of being able to read it and hear it aloud in my head...
You should be aware (particularly because of our exchanges) that the Sonata form is the greatest achievement in the composition. So, as an ambitious composer, you decide to use (to follow) this form for one of your composition. Definitely, the framework of your composition is the best possible. However, the way you are going to "draw" your picture and fill the form lies on the further rules, laws and the knowledge you have on the various aspects of Music. The tonality, the two themes and most importantly the development of them up to the coda need all your dedication, knowledge, experience till you fulfil your task.
No I am not a composer, and if I ever did try to write anything, I just need two themes, a development and a coda. Thank God for that. It's that simple!
It's like the application of gramar, vocabulary, syntax in writing a text.
Yes it is - would that you would follow such rules yourself which as you can see in the paragraph I quoted above this post I don't think you do!
Sports and Art are two quite, if not entirely, different things.
Correct - but the analogy T was making was that sometimes people wear the mantle of the experts when they can only spot 50% of what is going on! My dad, bless him 80 next month, I have often seen jump up to put the kettle on at half-time because he says that 'such and such only states the obvious'. So other people can see that one as well!
Within this framework, the vision plays the important role of how the composer conceived the outline of his work (e.g. Beethoven's Ninth or Missa Solemnis or the very enigmatic op.111).
I don't know if you have undertstood me properly Parla - and the fault may be mine in how I have explained it - but vision doesn't just mean the overall shape or outline of the work. It is the composer's vision of the big things I meant...life, humanity, the divine etc...It is much more than mere dots on paper which follow rules.
God! You don't half work my poor tired brain Parla at times.
Read Samuel Beckett Parla - and tell me what this epitaph means from one of his stories.
'Hereunder lies the above who up below
So hourly died that he lived on till now'
Wickedly funny I know, but try to decipher it!
I need to go to zzz Parla...you exhaust me at times!
Mark